A draft found here in the Mad Scientist Machines Tab. The basic premise is that these sentient beings take the form of run-down appliances and can construct absurdly designed creations that scientifically should not work.

SCP-XXXX instances must be contained in isolated vaults away from one another.

"Isolated" and "away from one another" cause redundancy. Also, your use of "vaults" does not help you distance yourself from the Fallout roots of your idea.

nefarious

Extremely non-clinical there.

artifacts

You earlier describe them as entities. Pick one.

If containment breach occurs from artifacts obtaining materials, the responsible parties and individuals will be punished by either demotion or termination.

How is this related to keeping the thing locked up?

In case of a containment breach, all security personnel are to destroy whatever new invention the instance holds within its possession.

"whatever new invention" is super vague.

With that said, all items created by SCP-XXXX are to be disposed of immediately after research.

How can they be sent to Research if they are destroyed? If you're talking about the remains, that should be specified.

Requests to demolish these items in order to discover their contents are pending. Please see Site manager to submit these requests.

You've already said they are to be automatically destroyed

SCP-XXXX-01 to 03 are anomalous entities taking the form of old appliances

This is again, pretty vague. This first lines should state precisely and clearly exactly what these things are, within the Foundation's knowledge.

Current study into the mechanics of how these appliances are capable of speech is still underway.

This is the first time we're told anything related to speech. You should state that they are before this sentence.

personas

The Foundation does not write about characters, in-universe.

most notably

Notability is subjective.

Practically any objects given to any instance of SCP-XXXX can be recreated into other paranormal constructs that usually serve no beneficial function.

Again, this is very very vague. Are there some objects that don't give this effect? Have there been times when there has been a beneficial function?

Usually

Anytime you use this word, it means there are exceptions to what you're about to say, making it vague. You need to tighten up writing concisely and clearly.

the artifacts maneuver through human counterparts that turn into biological devices once the artifact takes memetic control

I have utterly no idea what this is describing.

without being architecturally sound or even plausible

The whole point of the Foundation is that is deals with the scientifically implausible. You need to say why they are implausible.

giant wheel that is 3 m X 3 m

Wheels are not square. You should be talking about diameters and radii here.

Supposedly, a means of escape as the instance has taken the form of a toaster.

Fairly sure this is a broken sentence.

Artifact insists that we call him Dr. Tesla

The artifact? Also, that is such a terrible name.

sensually turning it's knob dials

lewd slurping

whip it with its electrical coil

That should be "its". As for the subject matter, your field agent is into some weird shit. Read, I don't think a formal report would use "sensually" or any of those words at all. It seems more like a kid trying to make a bad sex joke. Also, I don't think the Agent would get to reassign himself if he didn't like the job. There are loads of unpleasant jobs the Foundation needs doing, which wouldn't get done if this was the case.

A subject once manipulated…

It seems you are continuing the description after some kind of addenda? Try restructuring that.

defuse their interconnection

Reads like bad technobabble.

In a short paraphrased response

The whole of what you are writing is an executive summary. The most important bits of information, not reams of experimental data and things like that. It is perfectly acceptable to have abridged parts in the article, making this redundant.

non-Euclidean vehicle created from the transparent nervous activity that would be fueled by the "extra bits" left over in post lobotomy.

Again, bad technobabble. I know that is the point, but I don't like it. It takes a lot of skill to pull off intentionally bad writing.

All currently known instances have engineered machines that empirically should not function

Actually, empirically, they should function, because we have seen them functioning. Clinical tone is not just about throwing in a bunch of scientific sounding words.

It wasn't until six hours later that guards could terminate the creation after it ran nearly 60 mph throughout Site-67's corridors

Combat scenes that make the Benny Hill Theme play in a person's head are never good.

SCP-XXXX-Log-02 Message To All Researchers:

Is this meant to be written by a researcher used to high-stress situations and the paranormal, or an angry 13-year-old? The characterization here is not the best.

evacuated from the bodies which then proceeded to [DATA EXPUNGED]

Bad expungement.

Interviews

I'm struggling to even begin dissecting the mistakes here. The dialogue is awful and completely derivative of Old World Blues, where you say you got the idea. The only way I can offer constructive advice here is to read it out loud out see it it sounds natural. The researchers do not seem like professionals in any way. The random self-insert would be frowned upon.

As I said in the ideas forum, trying to emulate the style of someone who did it better than you is not a way to make creative works. There were problems in literally every single sentence. I'd advise scrapping this and working on an original idea that you care about. This will probably be more conducive to creating an entertaining piece of writing.